Laver v. Hotaling
California Supreme Court
APPEAL from Superior Court, City and County of San Francisco; John Hunt, Judge. Action by Augustus Laver and another against A. P. Hotaling to recover for services rendered by plaintiffs as architects. From a judgment in favor of plaintiffs, defendant appeals.
1Opinion of the Court
BRITT, C.
Plaintiffs are copartners in the practice of their profession of architects. They sued in this action to recover the alleged reasonable value of services performed, it is claimed, at defendant’s request in the preparation of drawings, plans and specifications for a building defendant had in mind to erect. After verdict and judgment in plaintiffs’ favor, the court granted a new trial on the sole ground specified in its order that it erred at the trial “in permitting the introduction of evidence of a rule of compensation of architects established by architects’ institutes or…
Also in this document: Per curiam.
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Blake v. StumpCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1890
- Taliaferro v. First National BankCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1889
- Stallings v. GottschalkCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1893
- McMasters v. Pennsylvania RailroadSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1871
3Cited by5 opinions
- Miller v. Germain Seed & Plant Co.California Supreme Court · 1924
- Metropolitan National Bank v. Commercial State BankSupreme Court of Iowa · 1898
- Smith v. National Bank of D. O. Mills & Co.U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Northern California · 1911
- State v. NaylorOregon Supreme Court · 1915
- Miller v. Germain Seed & Plant Co.California Supreme Court · 1924